Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 139 posts

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#11

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

piquadrat wrote: post #7
ktizo wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bigger problem for the studios is that if word gets out that a blockbuster movie fails the expectations of its potential audience. Surely advance screenings and reviews have exactly the same effect in that case.

Word of mouth from your fellow franchise fans might have a bigger influence than Roger Ebert dissing the movie. Also, there's such a thing as a review embargo. It would be interesting to see how review embargos correlate with box office success and after-the-fact ratings.

The embargoes only run until a week or so before release - ultimately they want them discussed remember, that's just about trying to focus the publicity into a short period before release.

If the studios think they have a real turkey on their hands (and they'll know this before the critics see it - the focus groups will have told them if they didn't know just by watching themselves) they tend to drop all press screenings.

But you're right that word of mouth will often be more significant than a review. Blockbuster type films tend to be completely critic proof - the reviewers can savage them as much as they like and there's little impact - but if a couple of friend's whose opinions you trust tell you a film sucks there's a good chance you'll steer clear.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#12

Post by dacilselig »

If I may play Devil's Advocate. I can understand why Distributors, movie companies, etc go so far in pushing anti piracy. Not necessarily just because of the fact that it hurts profits (although by a minor fraction), but also because it's only logical to do so. If movie companies were to one day come out and say that they are ok with people pirating their movies, who's to say that it won't increase the number of people attempting to pirate the movies since you would not be punished. In this case the act of making pirating taboo and portraying it as anti social behavior helps in minimizing the acceptance that pirating is OK by mass advertising(Although this technique may not effective, but I haven't read enough to get a sense that it doesn't work). Although they take extreme measures, it's that fear of getting caught that helps in maintaining their profits which make their share holders happy.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#13

Post by Retric »

walexander wrote: post #10
piquadrat wrote: post #2

Claiming a camcorded copy of a movie seriously impacts box office attendance is the same as arguing that concert bootlegs stop people from seeing artists on stage The direct impact of cam releases might very well be negligible. The bigger problem for the studios is that if word gets out that a blockbuster movie fails the expectations of its potential audience. That probability is much higher if there are CAMs availab…

> So, to minimize losses caused by piracy, make your movie not suck. Yes, but it doesn't work exactly like that. s/not suck/profitable. This just means that instead of taking chances on a film which is a big risk (think Inception), we will simply see more and more super hero movies and more and more sequels. There is much less of a margin of error when people are downloading things. I think there's little or no room…

Inception was hardly a 'risky' movie, plenty of explosions, cool visuals, and a simple but slightly ambiguous plot. Think of the way 'total recall' ends, is this just the vacation he had paid for? If you think about it they are fairly similar movies, and fairly well liked. If anything, I think suggests that a good movie can also have mass appeal.

WALL-E lacks dialog for 1/2 the movie, but because Pixar could test it out ahead of time they knew it was worth making vary early in the process. Pixar's string of hits has a lot to do with constant refinement and feedback. Saying Hollywood needs to put out more Toy Story 3's is not a terrible thing when their done well. There is something to be said for the old script + 6 weeks of frantic shooting + cutting room floor style of movies, but it's a style that showed up when film was expensive and budgets where tight.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#14

Post by ender7 »

walexander wrote: post #10
piquadrat wrote: post #2

Claiming a camcorded copy of a movie seriously impacts box office attendance is the same as arguing that concert bootlegs stop people from seeing artists on stage The direct impact of cam releases might very well be negligible. The bigger problem for the studios is that if word gets out that a blockbuster movie fails the expectations of its potential audience. That probability is much higher if there are CAMs availab…

> So, to minimize losses caused by piracy, make your movie not suck. Yes, but it doesn't work exactly like that. s/not suck/profitable. This just means that instead of taking chances on a film which is a big risk (think Inception), we will simply see more and more super hero movies and more and more sequels. There is much less of a margin of error when people are downloading things. I think there's little or no room…

This was, sadly, a problem long before piracy came along. Hollywood is a famously conservative industry.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#15

Post by truxs »

piquadrat wrote: post #2

Claiming a camcorded copy of a movie seriously impacts box office attendance is the same as arguing that concert bootlegs stop people from seeing artists on stage The direct impact of cam releases might very well be negligible. The bigger problem for the studios is that if word gets out that a blockbuster movie fails the expectations of its potential audience. That probability is much higher if there are CAMs availab…

Exactly, when you look at the list of biggest sales you realize that the list is pretty much the same for pirated movies.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#16

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

walexander wrote: post #10
piquadrat wrote: post #2

Claiming a camcorded copy of a movie seriously impacts box office attendance is the same as arguing that concert bootlegs stop people from seeing artists on stage The direct impact of cam releases might very well be negligible. The bigger problem for the studios is that if word gets out that a blockbuster movie fails the expectations of its potential audience. That probability is much higher if there are CAMs availab…

> So, to minimize losses caused by piracy, make your movie not suck. Yes, but it doesn't work exactly like that. s/not suck/profitable. This just means that instead of taking chances on a film which is a big risk (think Inception), we will simply see more and more super hero movies and more and more sequels. There is much less of a margin of error when people are downloading things. I think there's little or no room…

Inception wasn't that big a risk. Nolan had proved he could do ideas (Memento), he'd proved he could do big budget (two Batman films) and he was willing to stick major stars in it (including arguably the biggest star on the planet). They then backed that up with a $100m advertising budget.

In many ways it was an art house sci-fi film but in many others it did everything by the book for a big budget movie (proven track record, stars, special effects and action then hype it to the hilt).

You're right that the pattern is towards the more conservative but I'm not sure that Inception was a massively out there move.

Requiem for a Dream is a completely different beast and shows the other way you can do it even now. That was a cheap film - £5m or so. Adjust for inflation and you get maybe double that, which is still less than 5% of the budget of the Avengers.

That sort of film can be funded by smaller production companies, by larger studios (often as vanity / credibility projects - Schindler's List was seen that way when it was signed off though I doubt the studio will admit that now) and in a host of other ways. I can certainly see large studios funding things like that almost as part of an incubator model - giving new directors who seem promising a stage to show what they can do before they let them loose on something larger.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#17

Post by iamben »

For me it usually comes down to the 'is it worth it?' Avengers was worth it - you knew it was going to be great in 3D, explosions, cinema sound, Iron Man, etc. Whilst I begrudged paying £16 (~$26 US) for me and the girlfriend (before even thinking about drinks / popcorn) we were always going to see it in the cinema.

Compare that to a film that doesn't excite me (or most of the general population), and all of a sudden I'd rather wait for the movie on Netflix or whatever, because then £16 is better spent on a takeaway and watching from home.

I know films are different strokes for different folks, but the cinema is really overpriced if you're in the 'shall we / shan't we' category, so I can understand people just thinking - I'll pirate it and save the money (or spend it on dinner) and watch from the comfort of my home - the risk to reward is so much lower.

I'm not saying that's right - just with the cost as it is you need a great (or mass appeal) product to get bums on seats. Or you have lower the cost in cinemas and make going to the cinema the experience ("we can choose a film when we get there") rather than people just going to see something in particular.

EDIT: Regardless, great article on TF ;-)

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#18

Post by yirt »

tseabrooks wrote: post #4

Torrentfreak's articles seem to get better and better. They note the ways in which piracy is hurting films (foreign sales) and show some numbers indicating that in the US it doesn't appear to be hurting sales much at all. While obviously torrentfreak can't ever be considered objective in regards to piracy, they seem to be getting closer each time. Back on topic then, Does anyone have the background necessary to know…

Well, the pirates are 'disrupting' it rather effectively.

But through more official channels, there's not much which can be done until rights-holders wise up. They have been and remain the core bottleneck.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#19

Post by bobsy »

A thing to note is that it was a CAM recording of the film that was leaked.

I have only ever watched one cam recording of a movie before. I think it was 'The Illusionist.' I was at a friends house, he slapped it on. The color saturation was wrong, the sound was like mono and the camera appeared slightly off so the very top or bottom of the screen was cut off. It wasn't completely unwatchable but it spoiled the movie. Its like watching a film through a neighbours window.. crap.

Piracy has far more effect on DVD sales. This is for 4 reasons. The price of DVD's, the inconvenience of going out and getting the DVD, the bullshit adverts and unskipable junk before the film and the menu which takes 20 seconds to display before you can press PLAY.

If there was a DVD quality recording of the avengers I think it would have easily had 5x more downloads, probably 10x. However, realistically the cinema is an experience. If you enjoy the cinema you are going to watch a film like this at the cinema - then maybe download it. I am firmly of the opinion that if you make a blockbuster film, whether it leaks or not it will do well.

Re: The Avengers: Why Pirates Failed To Prevent A Box Office Record

#20

Post by rmc »

piquadrat wrote: post #2

Claiming a camcorded copy of a movie seriously impacts box office attendance is the same as arguing that concert bootlegs stop people from seeing artists on stage The direct impact of cam releases might very well be negligible. The bigger problem for the studios is that if word gets out that a blockbuster movie fails the expectations of its potential audience. That probability is much higher if there are CAMs availab…

Or alternativly, piracy will reduce spend on a crappy film, and people will spend the money elsewhere in the economy, and not waste it on something they won't like. Piracy of crappy films makes The Market better.
Post reply on HN